M. R. PATHAK, SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Nurul Hoque, S/o Late Riaz Uddin – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Medhi, J.
The extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court has been sought to be invoked by filing this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by putting to challenge the judgment an order dated 18.06.2018 passed by the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal No.9, Nagaon in F.T. Case No. 728/2016. By the impugned judgment, the petitioner who was the proceedee before the learned Tribunal has been declared to be a foreigner post 25.03.1971.
2. The facts of the case may be put in a nutshell as follows:
(ii) As per requirement u/s 9 of the Foreigner’s Act, 1946 to prove that the proceedee is not a foreigner, the petitioner had filed the written statement on 20.04.2017 along with certain documents.
(iii) The learned Tribunal after considering the facts and circumstances and taking into account of the provisions of Section 9 of the Foreigners’ Act, 1946 had come to a finding that the petitioner as opposite party had failed to discharge the burden cast upon him and accordingly, the opinion was rendered declaring the p
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies with the proceedee, who must provide cogent and reliable evidence. Documents must be appreciated as a whole, and documentary evidence should be corro....
The burden of proof under Section 9 of the Foreigners' Act, 1946 lies on the proceedee, who must provide cogent and reliable evidence to prove citizenship.
The burden of proving citizenship under the Foreigners Act, 1946 lies with the proceedee, and voter lists alone do not establish nationality without supportive evidence.
The burden of proof for establishing citizenship under the Foreigners Act, 1946 lies solely with the proceedee, and the evidence must be credible and consistent to meet this burden.
The burden of proving citizenship is on the proceedee under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and the Writ Court does not review factual determinations of the Tribunal unless procedural impropri....
The burden of proof lies with the individual claiming citizenship, under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, requiring cogent evidence to substantiate the claim.
The burden of proving citizenship lies entirely on the proceedee, and failure to provide cogent and reliable evidence results in a declaration of foreign nationality under Section 9 of the Foreigners....
The burden of proving citizenship rests entirely on the individual. In exercising supervisory jurisdiction, the court does not act as an appellate body and will not reweigh evidence or interfere with....
The burden of proving citizenship rests entirely on the proceedee under the relevant statute. In writ jurisdiction, the court acts in a supervisory capacity and will not interfere with factual findin....
The burden of proving citizenship lies exclusively with the individual. In supervisory writ jurisdiction, courts cannot substitute their findings of fact for those of the adjudicatory body unless the....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.